"a slightly more equal distribution of companies’ total revenues,” which is a nice way of saying the highest-paid employees would see their incomes increase more slowly, explains Jeannette Wicks-Lim, an economist at the University of Massachusetts Amherst and one of the signees of the petition."

that's right. punish the productive/qualified so everyone can be equal.

"Why not figure out how we can provide our employees and their families reasonable insurance instead of this nonsense."

This made me laugh. Health insurance is one of the biggest rackets on the planet. The "free market" has given you what you have now. Obamacare is an attempt (not a perfect one) to bring some order to the chaos in this industry. From some initial data it' appears to be working. Most of the people I meet personally or see in the media that oppose the plan are either already on govt insurance (medicare), or are wealthy and are not affected by the law at all.

I didn't read the link, so forgive me if it was mentioned, but:
Raising the minimum wage, in additions to forcing lay-offs and increasing the price of goods and services will increase the tax base so the only real winner is government.

When you raise minimum wage it does generally increase the upper level salaries along with and of course it also pushes prices up with it as it should. What so many people like most posts on this thread are too "SHORT SIGHTED" to see is that there are a few bills that won't go up if you're like most of us. Your mortgage doesn't go up. I don't have a boat mortgage like many people on here do but that won't go up either. This is how we get ahead. With the devaluation of money that comes with inflation, your pay goes up and your house payment becomes of smaller percentage of your income. People who are upside down in their mortgage get even or better because house prices go up with that inflation. If you sell your house and upgrade then you won't feel it but if you can be satisfied then you will have a greater percentage of disposable income to spend on things that aren't just a place to sleep, cook, and get out of the rain. Then when you're spending that extra dough on things that aren't just bank interest it helps the economy as a whole and stokes the fire for even more prosperity. The poor break even as you say because they don't own their homes. The elderly retired on fixed incomes have trouble which is why you always hear old people wining about inflation. You wanted to cut their social security anyway so why would you care? The rest of us win big time. The reason inflation is so demonized is because the baby boomers have a very powerful lobby and the other losers are the banks who also have a very powerful lobby. You want to be the bitch taking it in the rear from the baby boomers and the banks? I sure as hell don't. Get educated about how the economy works before you just spew what you heard on a misinforming news program.

pretty interesting analysis. So inflation is good for the avg person who has loans but if you dont have loans. inflation negatively affects you, So everyone go out and get loans!!! i think this is eric's point.

"Why not figure out how we can provide our employees and their families reasonable insurance instead of this nonsense."

This made me laugh. Health insurance is one of the biggest rackets on the planet. The "free market" has given you what you have now. Obamacare is an attempt (not a perfect one) to bring some order to the chaos in this industry. From some initial data it' appears to be working. Most of the people I meet personally or see in the media that oppose the plan are either already on govt insurance (medicare), or are wealthy and are not affected by the law at all.

A single source government supplied program will never be efficient. Let me tell you if I was the sole source of toothpicks, marbles or nose rings the markup and distribution would change dramatically over time. Our free market economy is what keeps things monitored and competitive. The other out of control item in the program will be fraud. It will be uncontrolled. Think about the DMV - that is how your health care will look. At least everyone will have a job, a government job that is.

If you want to screw those with insurance go to a hospital for health care, they cannot turn you away and whatever you need will be subsidized by those with insurance.

Yes something needs to be done but this is not the solution. By the way, how can the President now decide to delay parts of the implementation of the program which is now law? There hidden a reason for the delay and its manipulative not beneficial.

Realistically, everyone's primary concern is how much healthcare costs and you need to make more in case something happens. I've always been curious as to how the healthcare industry would be if there wasn't insurance and everyone was paying out of their pocket. My guess, healthcare would be a lot cheaper! As an example, I messed up my back and needed physical therapy. I go to the PT people I have gone to in the past but they don't take my new insurance because that provider doesn't pay them enough. I have an "HSA" plan where I have to pay for the first $4k out of my pocket. Check with insurance and they have a list of places I can go to and each appointment will cost me between $95 and $145 (again, out of my pocket) and that amount will go towards my deductible. Call my people again, they will charge me $45 for 30 min/$75 for 90 minutes but it doesn't go against my deductible and both have said 6 to 10 visits. Hmmm, if it's coming out of my pocket either way, I am going with the person I trust at 1/2 the cost and hope my deductible never comes into play. I actually went 10 times total but he told me I was ok to stop at about 7. I did the extra few because it was still cheaper for me and just wanted to make sure I stuck with the exercises afterwards.

When you raise minimum wage it does generally increase the upper level salaries along with and of course it also pushes prices up with it as it should. What so many people like most posts on this thread are too "SHORT SIGHTED" to see is that there are a few bills that won't go up if you're like most of us.

LOL! Devaluing currency is never good for a free market, at least not for the average consumer. Sure, the cost of residence and VERY few other fixed/contracted loans become a smaller percentage of income, but everything else surrounding the maintenance and living expenses increase.

From some initial data it' appears to be working. Most of the people I meet personally or see in the media that oppose the plan are either already on govt insurance (medicare), or are wealthy and are not affected by the law at all.

You shooting from the hip there or do you have a something to back that up. I manage and pay claims for a medium size company and our experience has been the exact opposite. Obamacare is not about access to healthcare, it was about the govt. getting their grubby hands access to the 6th largest industry in the country. They will **** it up, just like everything else they touch.

"Get educated about how the economy works before you just spew what you heard on a misinforming news program. "

that's the funniest thing that I have heard in a long time. you see, I own a small business. I know first hand what happens when big brother sticks his nose in and tries to manipulate the market. I reckon you work nine to five? Please.....get some real world experience before you start defending such a disastrous plan.

Realistically, everyone's primary concern is how much healthcare costs and you need to make more in case something happens. I've always been curious as to how the healthcare industry would be if there wasn't insurance and everyone was paying out of their pocket. My guess, healthcare would be a lot cheaper!

Exactly!

Srock says... "A single source government supplied program will never be efficient."

Efficiency isn't the issue here. Per capita healthcare costs in socialized healthcare countries are much lower than in the US. Contrary to popular belief healthcare is not a free market operation in the US. It is hyper-inflated by govt subsidies cut from income tax revenue and complex inequitable IRS rules.

If you simply changed tax law to disallow deductions for HI, tax employer contributions, and allowed employees to opt out and take employer contributions as pay, the HI industry would be destroyed and the healthcare system would go critical until it could re-adapt to a competitive environment.

Another perfectly reasonable law if enacted would change things radically. That being... mandate that HC providers charge the same to everyone for the same service. They can charge what they want but everyone gets exactly the same bill for the same service.

Per capita healthcare in socialized countries is not cheaper. Germany you pay 17% of your income for life just for the healthcare. Then they completely leave out the fact that you the taxpayer also pays for the doctors and nurses to go to school to learn that trade. No way it is cheaper. Now if you want to count that they hold wages down so the absolute dollar amount is lower, then you can make the very carefully crafted lie that healthcare is cheaper in socialized countries. I don't see too many $100,000 wage earners paying $17,000 a year each (not including a married partner) for insurance and paying additional taxes for the college education for those doctors.

Increasing minimum wage increases unemployment and poverty, which consequently (under the socialist regime in this country) increases the number of people living on welfare, which is to say living on money forcibly stolen from the productive class. Increases in minimum wage also disproportionately increase the unemployment rate of minorities, primarily blacks.

Pay is not going up at anywhere near the true inflation rate, in fact pay is going down for most Americans.

Please tell me how inflation benefited the Weimar Republic, or Austria in 1922, or China in 1940's, or Zimbabwe.

Yes, inflation is good! Now, that's funny...

Cost-Push inflation caused by the increase minimum wage is good then??? Those who deny a correlation in inflation and increased wages are those who believe these increased employee costs are absorbed by business but we all know it becomes a pass-through cost. While I will acknowledge this only affects certain service and retail businesses and many of the big businesses do not have much of a minimum wage workforce aside from janitorial staff ect (and even then they are likely unionized if your corp is big enough).

I'm not opposed to indexing and most states take a lead on minimum wage already so I don't understand your position.

Saw this happen in Santa Cruz, College kids voted to increase the minimum wage, and our friends own 2 restaurants there and they had to up prices making it hard to afford for those same college kids...

Apparently if you are in retail, you can pay your employees an acceptable wage, give them healthcare and a 401k plan and make good profit - Costco does:http://money.cnn.com/2013/08/06/news....html?iid=Lead
Some argue it's due to the $55 membership fee but they only collect that 1 time per customer. I would love to know how much that membership fee contributes to the bottom line because it can't be their only profit or what makes them just barely get by.

Cost-Push inflation caused by the increase minimum wage is good then??? Those who deny a correlation in inflation and increased wages are those who believe these increased employee costs are absorbed by business but we all know it becomes a pass-through cost. While I will acknowledge this only affects certain service and retail businesses and many of the big businesses do not have much of a minimum wage workforce aside from janitorial staff ect (and even then they are likely unionized if your corp is big enough).

I'm not opposed to indexing and most states take a lead on minimum wage already so I don't understand your position.

You can not pass all costs of a good or service to the buyer/user. Economics 101 says that prices are established by supply and demand, not cost. Everyone thinks that you can just pass on any increased expenses to the customer; however nothing is further from the truth. The customer will cease to buy a good or service if the price is more than they are willing to pay. The customer will seek a replacement product or similar alternative. If you could pass all costs on to the consumer then very few businesses would go out of business.

Increased costs are not absorbed by the consumer, but more often than not by the profit margin. Simple economics.

Only way the per capita cost is lower is if you are only talking about absolute dollars. Example if German's only pay $7500 a year and American's pay $10,000 a year then it would be a true statement. If you dig, German's pay 17% a year per person for insurance. Also not included is the fact that the same German's are also paying for the Doctors and Nurses education. I bet their overall contribution is well over 20% per person for life. Another thing is if a german makes enough money, they can actually purchase their own insurance and from what I understand wealthy German's do just that according to my buddy that has lived in Germany for 20 plus years.

I do not think many Americans are paying over 20 plus percent a year for their healthcare in direct costs (per person)

You can not pass all costs of a good or service to the buyer/user. Economics 101 says that prices are established by supply and demand, not cost. Everyone thinks that you can just pass on any increased expenses to the customer; however nothing is further from the truth. The customer will cease to buy a good or service if the price is more than they are willing to pay. The customer will seek a replacement product or similar alternative. If you could pass all costs on to the consumer then very few businesses would go out of business.

Increased costs are not absorbed by the consumer, but more often than not by the profit margin. Simple economics.

You fail to acknowledge this is where jobs leakage comes into play. Price yourself out of the market. There are fixed costs and companies won't operate at a loss for very long before going out of business of relocating. Businesses with low margins that are hostage to local will have to increase costs of go out of business.

You fail to acknowledge this is where jobs leakage comes into play. Price yourself out of the market. There are fixed costs and companies won't operate at a loss for very long before going out of business of relocating. Businesses with low margins that are hostage to local will have to increase costs of go out of business.

The flaw in the free market is its dependence on the ethics and integrity of the population. Its been tossed up here before so I'm not going to go hunt it, but look up pay ratio in say 1949 between CEO and worker and contrast it to now. When our greatest generation was in the workforce, CEOs made 20-1 what the worker earned. That's a lot, but fair for the skilled position.

Today, it averages 204 to 1, and in many cases, its closer to 2000 to 1. I'm all for free market, but at some point there has to be a line of reason. At some point the cash kills incentive to succeed. If I can do horribly for a year and walk away with more money than I can ever spend, why bother stressing myself to succeed?

If this were adjusted back to a reasonable level, there would certainly be improvement across the board. However, this is not something that can be legislated. It has to be a voluntary decision among companies to lead by example. We just do not possess that kind of integrity as a country any longer.

The flaw in the free market is its dependence on the ethics and integrity of the population. Its been tossed up here before so I'm not going to go hunt it, but look up pay ratio in say 1949 between CEO and worker and contrast it to now. When our greatest generation was in the workforce, CEOs made 20-1 what the worker earned. That's a lot, but fair for the skilled position.

Today, it averages 204 to 1, and in many cases, its closer to 2000 to 1. I'm all for free market, but at some point there has to be a line of reason. At some point the cash kills incentive to succeed. If I can do horribly for a year and walk away with more money than I can ever spend, why bother stressing myself to succeed?

If this were adjusted back to a reasonable level, there would certainly be improvement across the board. However, this is not something that can be legislated. It has to be a voluntary decision among companies to lead by example. We just do not possess that kind of integrity as a country any longer.

Do you want to have a discussion on Adam Smith and The Wealth of Nations, because if you do we have to also talk about The Theory of Moral Sentiments. You can't destroy the concept of the Invisible Hand and not expect the other to prevail or vice versa.

Norcalrider,
Exactly, profit margins can not "absorb" the increased costs because they are already small. While this is true, it is also true that "price" can not "absorb" the increased costs; therefore, the business has no choice but to fold. This is what I am saying.

What a bunch of winers. The best part is that every doom and gloom winer on here is running a boat that costs more than a lot of people pay for their houses. Lets all wine about how we can't afford to pay our low level employees a fair wage while we all purchase another vacation home. You're all whaling "I only own an 80 thousand dollar boat and I want the new 120 thousand dollar boat". It must be the fault of my dishwasher Bob because he gets 7.50 per hour instead of the 3.35 per hour that I want to pay him. Who cares that Bob already can't afford the rent in the flea bag he lives in? Sure Bob is just a dishwasher and he should get a better skill but that's why he's having trouble with his rent instead of having trouble getting a new G23. How much do I pay in taxes to subsidize your employees because you don't pay a livable wage? How much extra do I pay in Schedule C tax because people who have a business income higher than
~200K get to use a different method of calculation than I do? Why don't some of you come and try to get it out of my wallet like a man instead of being a bunch of pansies hiding behind your law makers? Do you really think it's the poor that have anything to do with how much tax you pay when we spend 700 billion a year on D.O.D.? Bob the dishwasher isn't the problem here. A bunch of greedy a holes who think that paying taxes is for someone else is the problem. I don't want to know any of you.

What a bunch of winers. The best part is that every doom and gloom winer on here is running a boat that costs more than a lot of people pay for their houses. Lets all wine about how we can't afford to pay our low level employees a fair wage while we all purchase another vacation home. You're all whaling "I only own an 80 thousand dollar boat and I want the new 120 thousand dollar boat". It must be the fault of my dishwasher Bob because he gets 7.50 per hour instead of the 3.35 per hour that I want to pay him. Who cares that Bob already can't afford the rent in the flea bag he lives in? Sure Bob is just a dishwasher and he should get a better skill but that's why he's having trouble with his rent instead of having trouble getting a new G23. How much do I pay in taxes to subsidize your employees because you don't pay a livable wage? How much extra do I pay in Schedule C tax because people who have a business income higher than
~200K get to use a different method of calculation than I do? Why don't some of you come and try to get it out of my wallet like a man instead of being a bunch of pansies hiding behind your law makers? Do you really think it's the poor that have anything to do with how much tax you pay when we spend 700 billion a year on D.O.D.? Bob the dishwasher isn't the problem here. A bunch of greedy a holes who think that paying taxes is for someone else is the problem. I don't want to know any of you.

So you believe in Marxism? From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

Bob should have used a little forethought and not had three kids. He should have lived with roommates for a couple years, saved money, payed for an education, gained a marketable skill, and started a business, and hired some of his friends to do the same. If he had, he would be taking care of a whole bunch of Bob's. Instead, you expect me to pay for Bob's ignorance and lack of forethought. You expect me to pay Bob a living wage for a job that is not meant to be lived off of. You having to subsidize my employees is not my fault, it is the employees fault, and whomever subsidizes them (the government). If you let a few Bob's go without food and housing there will be less people like Bob. Bob's problem is not mine, I owe Bob nothing and Bob is entitled to any of my work or the results of such work.

"Everyone cuts their own deal in life... Brother"
― Hulk Hogan

“I am for doing good to the poor, but...I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed...that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”
― Benjamin Franklin

Were you not taught about Plymouth Rock and William Bradford? Men must be motivated to act in their own best interest, without doing so, they are reduced to producing only what is necessary, if that.

Only way the per capita cost is lower is if you are only talking about absolute dollars. Example if German's only pay $7500 a year and American's pay $10,000 a year then it would be a true statement. If you dig, German's pay 17% a year per person for insurance. Also not included is the fact that the same German's are also paying for the Doctors and Nurses education. I bet their overall contribution is well over 20% per person for life. Another thing is if a german makes enough money, they can actually purchase their own insurance and from what I understand wealthy German's do just that according to my buddy that has lived in Germany for 20 plus years.

I do not think many Americans are paying over 20 plus percent a year for their healthcare in direct costs (per person)

Are you only going to use Germany as your example, because your statement was "socialized countries" and I believe that includes more that just Germany (the numbers I saw were closer to 15% for Germans and I have yet to find the part that mentions any payments for med and nursing school, but I didn't have much time for in-depth research. I did read where Germans do have an option to buy private insurance)? I have found several comparisons of "Healthcare as a portion of GDP" and nothing supports your argument.

So you believe in Marxism? From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

Bob should have used a little forethought and not had three kids. He should have lived with roommates for a couple years, saved money, payed for an education, gained a marketable skill, and started a business, and hired some of his friends to do the same. If he had, he would be taking care of a whole bunch of Bob's. Instead, you expect me to pay for Bob's ignorance and lack of forethought. You expect me to pay Bob a living wage for a job that is not meant to be lived off of. You having to subsidize my employees is not my fault, it is the employees fault, and whomever subsidizes them (the government). If you let a few Bob's go without food and housing there will be less people like Bob. Bob's problem is not mine, I owe Bob nothing and Bob is entitled to any of my work or the results of such work.

"Everyone cuts their own deal in life... Brother"
― Hulk Hogan

“I am for doing good to the poor, but...I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed...that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”
― Benjamin Franklin

Were you not taught about Plymouth Rock and William Bradford? Men must be motivated to act in their own best interest, without doing so, they are reduced to producing only what is necessary, if that.

What an effing joke. Without the "Bob's" of the world, you would only have a head the size of a basketball instead of the Goodyear blimp you are carrying around on your shoulders.

Are you only going to use Germany as your example, because your statement was "socialized countries" and I believe that includes more that just Germany (the numbers I saw were closer to 15% for Germans and I have yet to find the part that mentions any payments for med and nursing school, but I didn't have much time for in-depth research. I did read where Germans do have an option to buy private insurance)? I have found several comparisons of "Healthcare as a portion of GDP" and nothing supports your argument. Attachment 31182

Japan has one of the best health outcomes and look at their expenditures. I'm not opposed to a nationalized HC system but ACA is very poorly designed and will not result in significantly different health outcomes at more overall costs.

Rhetoric aside I think there is more agreement than not that we simply do NOT design our policies properly and both parties are to blame for that.

What an effing joke. Without the "Bob's" of the world, you would only have a head the size of a basketball instead of the Goodyear blimp you are carrying around on your shoulders.

The Bob's of the world are not required, only people who will hold Bob' station in life for a short period of time are. Working as a dishwasher is a not a career, it is a entry-level job. As an entry-level job Bob may be required to either live with a roommate, work multiple jobs, or both. I do not owe Bob a "living wage" and Bob's station in life is not my responsibility.

With your mindset, Rafael Cruz would still be a dishwasher.

Your ideals have been proven not to work time and time again, but people like you always believe they can create a better form of socialism. You can call me whatever you want, I don't care.

Do you want to have a discussion on Adam Smith and The Wealth of Nations, because if you do we have to also talk about The Theory of Moral Sentiments. You can't destroy the concept of the Invisible Hand and not expect the other to prevail or vice versa.

Like I said, I'm all for the free market and would never vote to remove the invisible hand, but I appreciate the days of when an employer cared about his employees to the point that he felt his own wealth was increased by taking care of those who work for them. Owners can create their own wealth by squeezing it out of customers, or employees. Its far easier to squeeze employees, and the current character of our nation is one to take the easy road over the right one.

What is a private expenditure on health? Me buying vitamins? You have to look at percentage of individuals money. How about add another $250,000 to $500,000 for each doctor or $50,000 to $120,000 per each nurses education on to that and the cost of doctors insurance in America where they are allowed to sue. Germany was 14% for healthcare and 3% end of life healthcare per person for life. Again though per capita is a very broad term. For instance do you count the 14million or so illegal aliens that get treatment in the average? Do they count private expenditures on health related products?

Even with all that, it still does not mean anything until you look at it vs the mean income of each group. Not GDP because the private citizens do not get the direct profit of GDP.

Look at that link for 2011 average worker income from countries around the world. I took the disposable income after compulsory deductions and divided by your chart of spending per capita on healthcare.

Couple things you have to realize in the number for employee salary, this is based on people actually employed. Europe historically is over 10% unemployment as a low where the US has 10% as a historic high unemployment rate. The US also has to cover 14 million or more illegal aliens. We also do not have to wait months for an MRI and we certainly have better teeth than the British and we do not pay for doctors and nurses to go to school.

but
I started out as a dishwasher. I quickly climbed up the ladder. I now own multiple restaurants. and yes, I feel that I deserve the $100,000 boat if I want it. I'm the one that invested the time and money into new stores. I'm the one that stressed out about cash flow, about labor, inventory....overhead. I'm the one that couldn't sleep at night wondering how to drive customers to my place instead of the big chain guy....etc....etc.....not to mention being stressed about trying to get the Bob's more hours or more money, while I kept the numbers in line......

I've never asked anyone to feel bad for me because I was more stressed that the 9 to 5'er, but I am also not going to apologize for having a nice boat, or a cool car, or a big house.....

but
I started out as a dishwasher. I quickly climbed up the ladder. I now own multiple restaurants. and yes, I feel that I deserve the $100,000 boat if I want it. I'm the one that invested the time and money into new stores. I'm the one that stressed out about cash flow, about labor, inventory....overhead. I'm the one that couldn't sleep at night wondering how to drive customers to my place instead of the big chain guy....etc....etc.....not to mention being stressed about trying to get the Bob's more hours or more money, while I kept the numbers in line......